Agenda item

To receive a report on the progress of works to improve the fire safety standard in the Council’s housing stock.

Councillor Southwood (Lead Member for Housing and Welfare Reform) introduced the report. She highlighted that it was Brent Housing Management’s (BHM)core responsibility as a landlord to keep residents safe, and the work outlined in the report was amongst the most important that BHM undertook. Following the Grenfell Tragedy, the Council had committed to do whatever was needed to ensure tenants in high rise blocks were kept safe and pledged not only to do a proper assessment of the safety measures in place and how adequate they were, but also to find the funding where necessary to fix things. It was positive that the assessments found evidence that fire safety had been a priority over the years and changes had been made in properties over time to keep tenants safe.

The paper also outlined the regular regime for safety assessments and the work done in low and medium rise blocks over the past few years, including the approximate spend on works completed, which was around £5m, affecting over 6,000 households. The paper outlined the fire safety programme in high rise blocks which was about to start. Councillor Southwood highlighted the significance and complexity of those works, and the need to invest significantly in those blocks as part of the major works programme to embed fire safety works within that programme. It was likely that tenants and leaseholders would be significantly impacted by the works and BHM had begun that consultation with leaseholders, with a commitment to do that work well. She added that the paper concluded with looking forward, for example ensuring the Council was ready to meet the requirements of the Fire Safety Bill when it became law.

The Chair thanked Councillor Southwood for her introduction to the report and invited comments and questions from those present, with the following issues raised:

The Committee wanted to know how BHM communicated with residents to let them know what changes were being made to keep them safe. Councillor Southwood felt it was important to strike a balance with tenants and leaseholders which provided reassurance on one hand, but did not look complacent. Hakeem Osinaike (Operational Director Housing, Brent Council) advised that there were different ways BHM communicated with residents. When it came to works, that engagement took place nearer the time BHM would be looking to do the works. For example, at Kilburn Square there had been many meetings to discuss what the works would entail, what it would look like for them, and where they had options. There was then statutory consultation specifically with leaseholders regarding the works and how much their share of the costs was likely to be.

In relation to how much money had been paid from leaseholders on fire safety works over the last few years, the Committee could be provided with those figures. Fire safety works were usually done in conjunction with major works, but where only fire works were carried out those figures could be provided.

Regarding fire safety reports, the Committee queried to what extent BHM relied on these to decide whether to conduct fire safety works. They were advised that BHM employed professional agencies to do fire inspections in blocks, with annual inspections on high rise blocks and inspections every three years in low rise as a statutory requirement. Type 4 fire inspections were not statutory but BHM had opted to conduct those to ensure they had detailed information on fire safety in all blocks. They also had stock condition surveys and the combination of those assessments and reports was used to inform the works needed in the blocks. Those reports were professionally commissioned and reliable. Where there were urgent works needed, a Section 20 would not necessarily be issued as there would not be time to undertake the consultation, which was permitted in law. Hakeem Osinaike advised that very few works were identified as urgent and therefore were commissioned as part of planned works, enabling time to consult with leaseholders. Under no circumstances would Brent Council ignore safety works that needed doing, and the landlord had the responsibility to determine what safety works were to be done whether leaseholders agreed or not, as they were the responsible owner and agency for fire safety works.

In relation to supporting leaseholders with the cost of fire safety works they were required to pay, Hakeem Osinaike advised that leaseholders had the opportunity to pay by instalments and spread payments. Where bills were significantly high the Council could put a charge on the property so that the leaseholder would not have to pay until they wanted to sell the property, and the Council offered to buy property back from the leaseholder also.

The Committee highlighted section 3.10 of the report, noting that the London Fire Brigade (LFB) had issued an enforcement notice that had since been signed off in relation to Granville New Homes properties. They queried how the LFB signed off the enforcement notice if the fire alarm system and monitoring had not yet been commissioned. Hakeem Osinaike advised that the enforcement notice did not require fire alarms, but the landlord, First Wave Housing Ltd, had opted to put in fire alarms as a temporary measure until other works were completed to enable residents to stay in their flat in the case of a fire. In this case, First Wave Housing had met all requirements from the LFB enforcement notice, LFB had attended the property and were satisfied, and had therefore signed the notice. There was a clear plan for completing the fire safety works in Granville properties and the consultation process had been completed for properties coming into the Housing Revenue Account (HRA).

The Committee drew the item to a close with a final question on how well residents were protected. Councillor Southwood advised that the report made clear the regime BHM was undertaking by way of prevention, including investigating buildings and making sure that the right measures were in place to ensure residents were safe should a fire break out whether they lived in a block with stay put arrangements or an evacuation policy. Other preventative measures included reminding residents to keep corridors clear for fire prevention, and a regime to test the robustness of fire safety in all BHM buildings. There was a commitment to stay prepared and ensure BHM were using the HRA to maximise the level of fire safety.

The Chair drew the item to a close and invited the Committee to make recommendations, with the following RESOLVED:

To recommend the following area of improvement:

i)      To review the Section 20 process for fire safety works, ensuring the distinction between fire safety works and refurbishment works is communicated to residents

The following information requests were made:

i)      That the Committee receives a breakdown of the financial contribution from leaseholders for fire safety related works across the Brent Housing Management estate within the previous three years

ii)     That the Committee receives a progress report in a years’ time on the Brent Housing Management’s programme of works to improve fire safety standards in the Council’s housing stock